In Conversation: Pooja Bhatt on the Nine-Dash-Line

IN CONVERSATION WITH POOJA BHATT

8 April 2020

What first drew you to the topic of the South China Sea, and why? How long has it taken you to research the book? Did anything surprise you about the history of the Nine-Dash-Line during your research for the book?

The project started in November 2016 when I started on a book-fellowship with Centre for Air Power Studies, an Indian Air Force research institute. The Permanent Court of Arbitration verdict on the South China Sea had come out a few months prior to that, in July 2016. The question that the project had put forward in front of me if is it just a military confrontation? My initial readings informed that the South China Sea needs a holistic approach from several aspects such as historical, economic, legal, inter-state relations, environmental dimensions. That led to a three-year study published in the form of this book.

What surprised during my entire period of research and continues to do so is the fact that despite China making such powerful claims over the resources in the South China Sea, it has seldom tried to assuage the historical and legal questions related to these. A very senior Chinese scholar sent a Google hard-drive full of material on Chinese position on the South China Sea but it was all in Mandarin. There is a reluctance amongst Chinese scholars to talk and write about it openly, beyond some boilerplate statements that follow the government's position.

What makes the South China Sea so contested as a body of water? Has the South China Sea always been this contested historically, or is this a more recent trend?

The issue with the South China Sea is a combination of the historical insecurities of the Chinese leadership; the geographical advantage that the waters provide strategically to littoral states; new dimensions added by recent international maritime laws relating to maritime delimitations; trade, and economics factor in too with the possibilities for new energy resource availability. Furthermore, the less-written but crucial dimension is the ecological impact of human actitivity in the region is another recent phenomenon.

However, what renders the region contested is the inability of the international community to define the region as a part of the 'Global Commons' and thereby provide the solutions accordingly. This is the main issue that the book has tried to raise.

What role does China specifically play in the South China Sea? Is it purely a military role as is often reported or are there other roles it undertakes in the region? What role does the maritime militia play?

China is the largest and the most economically-militarily advanced as compared to all the South China Sea littoral states. It has tried to make its case about its maritime rights and claims through the belligerent use of military forces or by seeking bilateral negotiations with other claimant countries. Both of these approaches are defective because it sidelines the rights and positions of the other regional stakeholders who are affected by it. The increasing presence of militaries from several countries, including the U.S., prevents us from seeing the region as one of the most economically productive, ecologically rich and culturally diverse parts of the Indo-Pacific.

The role, composition and the objective of the Maritime Militia have been one of the interesting ones as it uncovers the future of grey zone operations that includes civilians commanded by the military that defies the established international laws of warfare such as Geneva Conventions.

What role does energy and trade play in the South China Sea? How important are the sea-lanes in the region? Are hydrocarbons there in the quantities reported and are they being exploited?

The future is all about resources- be it energy, minerals or food, and importantly the control over them. In this regard, the potential reserves of the South China Sea could be extremely useful. Currently, the extraction of many of these resources might not be economically feasible or viable but that might not be the case in the coming decades. However, the exact quantities of these resources available in the South China Sea have been reported differently by Chinese as well as American authorities. An entire chapter in the book has been dedicated to this issue of discrepancy and points out the strategic motives for doing so.

Furthermore, most of the Northeast Asian economies are dependent upon the crude oil coming from the Middle East and Persian Gulf and therefore any disruption in these supplies can severely impact their energy security as well as development. Therefore, there are more stakeholders other than China that seek the security of these sea-lanes but none of them are as aggressive in their approach as Beijing.

How are other claimant states reacting to China’s behaviour in the South China Sea? What roles are Vietnam and Indonesia playing in the disputed waterways? How divided is ASEAN on the issue?

For me, the South China Sea is a stakeholder issue that includes both claimant and non-claimant countries. As claimant countries have more to lose, each of them is dealing with China at their individual bilateral level. That is the cause of division amongst ASEAN as not all the member states have maritime disputes with Beijing. Therefore, maritime claims and disputes have been given a lip-service in the ASEAN official statements since the 1990s, except for the years when the affected countries assumed the Chairmanship.

Individually, the position of Vietnam, Indonesia, and even the Philippines has undergone interesting shifts. Vietnam over the years has made its position in the South China Sea more vocal in the international diplomatic fora. On the other hand, Indonesia has taken the route of strengthening its military presence near the Natuna waters where it faces the People’s Liberation Army Navy and Chinese Coast Guard more aggressively. The Philippines, however, has sought to enhance its camaraderie with the Chinese leadership and work with them diplomatically, economically and militarily rather than taking a more solid stance since its much-touted Permanent Court of Arbitration win in 2016.

What is the legacy of the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling on the South China Sea? Has it successfully defined the issues of islands vs ‘low tide elevations’? What precedents did the 2016 ruling set?

The 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration verdict on the South China Sea dispute upheld the UNCLOS 1982 in spirit. It clearly understood the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court with regards to the matter and delivered its judgment in a nuanced and correct manner. The UNCLOS 82 under A.121 provides for the "Regime of the Island" that sets down standards for differentiation between islands, low tide elevations and rocks and the maritime delimitations that they may ensue based upon the status. The 2016 PCA verdict upheld this regime with respect to the SCS 'landforms' as most of them do not qualify as islands. The crucial observations made in the judgment right from delegalizing China's historic claims, considering Beijing's encroachment of Philippines' EEZ as excessive, recognizing the harm to the ecology of the SCS by its activities- all have multifold implications for the future of the maritime disputes.

What role does the United States (and its navy) play in the South China Sea dispute? Is it a neutral party as policymakers in Washington claim? Is there a role for tradtional U.S. allies like Japan, France, and the U.K. in the South China Sea? Does India too have a potential role to play?

This is a question about the perspective. From China's perspective, the presence of the U.S. military in the South China Sea is aggravating the issue militarily. From the US perspective, it's upholding the international maritime laws, ensuring free and open seas and safeguarding the interests of its treaty allies in the region.

The UK and France who have or are looking to increase their presence in the Indian Ocean are looking for newer partnerships with several regional and extra-regional countries to secure their interests. Japan is managing its delicate position between its economic co-existence with China despite their historical maritime dispute along with its military dependence on the U.S. This all is in flux at the moment based upon the interests as well as the capability that each country has on its own.

This holds true for India as well that has its economic interests in the South China Sea, and thereby is managing its relationship with each of the stakeholders for the benefit of the region at large. However, a bigger role that one can envisage for New Delhi is to make a stronger case for establishing the South China Sea and its resources as a part of the ‘Global Commons’ and build solidarity and cooperation amongst the parties and stakeholders about the issue.

What are the environmental consequences of the South China Sea dispute? Especially in response to the artificial islands being constructed by claimants. Is human-induced climate change having effects on the ecology of the South China Sea?

The waters of the South China Sea are unique and extremely fragile. Several species of flora and fauna are specific to this region and therefore need special protection. However, studies have shown that due to destructive human practices such as harmful fishing practices, dredging for building artificial islands, and overfishing, the region has seem irreversible damage.

The cognizance of the same was taken by the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration verdict. The issue of environment and ecology of the South China Sea has remained a less focussed aspect though consequences have been already been seen, for eg: The entire area under what is known as Nine-Dash Line, is nearly devoid of fish. International organizations as well NGOs need to disseminate more knowledge on these issues among the larger public for awareness.

What do you expect the South China Sea to look like in five years’ time? Will it still be as contested as it is now? Will there be a joint exploration of resources, or will it be a venue for great power competition, with submarines and maritime militia hunting one another?

International relations and politics are always multi-causal and therefore, any prediction is at its best, owing to the ongoing global climate. However, it does depend upon how China formulates its foreign policy issues and aligns with the interests of the rest of the world. It cannot be strong economically without having a strong market presence globally. And for that, it needs to ensure that its objectives are clearly and transparently presented by the leadership through mutual talks and negotiation. Any signs of a unilateral approach are generally faced with suspicion by the other parties.

The same goes for the issue of joint exploration of the resources in the South China Sea and the book has explained in detail as to why such activities are only economically feasible if they are done jointly with the other regional stakeholders on a profit-sharing basis. This also requires enhanced and transparent diplomatic and political efforts by all the parties.

On the other hand, the sale of submarines and other maritime platforms along with an increase in joint military exercises with Asian countries are becoming a feature of China's power projection and opens an another area of study. So does the increased role of the maritime militia as a part of 'grey zone tactics' that can be useful in future warfare.

How capable is China in projecting power beyond the South China Sea into the South Pacific? Can regional actors such as Australia and New Zealand retain their historical influence? Will South Pacific states such as Tonga, Fiji, and Vanuatu soon face what Southeast Asian states are facing in terms of security/economic trade-offs with China?

In recent times, there has been observed an increased power projection and regional presence beyond the SCS and mostly limited to economic and developmental assistance to the smaller South Pacific islands.it has worked so far diplomatically in the favour of China when some of the countries are severed their ties with Taiwan. These countries are small, and economically and ecologically fragile democracies. China is offering that support through economic assistance- exploiting the vacuum created by the US and Australia.

As the world is heading towards another global recession, the South Pacific island economies will become further vulnerable and therefore, seek more opportunities to strengthen themselves economically. It is only a matter of who provides that support.

DISCLAIMER: All views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent that of the 9DASHLINE.com platform.

Author biography

Pooja Bhatt is a PhD candidate at 'Disarmament and Diplomacy' division of Centre for International Politics, Organisation and Disarmament, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. She has earned her MPhil and Masters degree in IR from the same school. She worked with Centre for Air Power Studies, an Indian Air Force think tank where she focussed on maritime issues. Her new book Nine-Dash Line: Deciphering the South China Sea Conundrum is available now.

In Conversation9DLApril 8, 2020Pooja Bhatt, South China Sea, China